Except he did state that he doesn't smoke and has never smoked once in his life, which would kind of imply that he wasn't smoking. But I doubt even a simple answer of no would have made a difference because she later states that she SAW him smoking, probably betting that if it came down to her word against his she would win out.
The document signing bit had me wondering a little, by signing are you just acknowledging the receipt of the citation? Or by signing it are you actually admitting to something? Otherwise why are they trying to strong arm him into signing with threats of bigger penalties?
Finally, the devils advocate in me finds the Libertarian rants a little suspicious and can't help but wonder if maybe he was smoking because he was cop trolling so he could make a standing up to the man video.

While the cop is completely and utterly in the wrong, the video goes off at the end on some stupid libertarian nonsense, and then goes full-on godwin.

Interestingly, even the owner of the channel now admits that his language at the end is inflammatory and counter-productive.

None of which justifies his appalling treatment.

liberals are worst, but both are bad.

im more libertarian/green/constitution party

course I'm a NSA target waiting to happen anyhow since I wish we'd have a coup and reboot the government in US.

and execute them all current sitting for treason.

What are you talking about? You think Conservative politicians are good?

Here's the Conservative logic:

You a rich guy who's fucking over your workers by not paying them a living wage? Have a tax break, oh and thanks for the campaign contributions we'll find more tax breaks for you.
Oh look, those workers you aren't paying a living wage to need food stamps, let's cut food stamp funding then we'll be able to give you rich people more tax breaks.
Oh, you are moving those jobs overseas so you can keep more of the profits for yourself? Great idea, more money for you. We'll blame those jobs going overseas on the government and everyone will believe it and not blame the rich guy who moved the job overseas because being rich is good (despite what Jesus whom we pretend to like said) and government is bad.
We'll have the churches turn their backs against the teachings of Jesus and convince millions of Americans that Jesus meant the opposite and they'll vote for us thinking they are doing the Christian thing. Sure one or two people will lose faith and hate Christians [your's truly included, even if He is real, I'd rather be in Hell than be around Him or His people] because of it, but most of the faithful have been taught to accept anything the church says, so they'll all go along with the plan to fuck over the working class so that you rich people can have your great life.
We'll keep building more and more prisons, we'll turn them into profit making centers and incarcerate more people than any other nation for the good of corporate profit.
Let's make a pipeline filled with highly pollutive tar sands that will create 35 permanent full time jobs so that we can export a great deal of that oil. We'll tell people it's about "energy independence"and about all the jobs it'll create for the couple years of it's construction. We'll ignore the fact that upgrading our nations infrastructure would create far more jobs not only in the long term, but significantly more jobs in the short term as well., and that's just upgrading our electrical grid, not counting upgrading our freeways, bridges, dams, railways and the like.
Let's make more and more war, because war profits off killing a bunch of what we'll sell as savages is really good money for the rich.

Both sides have good and bad... well the left have good and bad. The right has people brainwashed into thinking they are doing good and the Lord's work...even though it's 100% opposite of what He taught... I hate myself for having ever voted and arguing for Conservative or even Libertarian "logic".

Rand Paul, like his father, was always crap. Libertarians are just REALLY short-sighted.

Yahweh has NEVER given evidence of his existence. No more so than any other god anyhow. They all answer prayer equally and randomly well. They all claim to have made the universe/world, they all claim to be the true one... Near death experiences differ by culture expectations of that culture and don't all conform to the supposed Christian expectation... he has done nothing to make himself stand out from the rest of the gods that Christians dismiss. Heck, I've never seen a Frost Giant or evidence they ever existed, so clearly Odin has one up on Yahweh.

In the 4,000 years or so from Adam and Eve's time in the Garden to Jesus, Yahweh couldn't or wouldn't make himself known to the other races. He didn't reveal himself to those in Africa, Asia, the Americas or Europe, just to one tiny specific group of people in the Middle East. If couldn't then he's not the omnipotent, omnipresent god he claims, if he wouldn't that makes him a racist ass not worthy of following by picking one people to be his chosen people.

The only reason Europe became Christian was forced conversion when the Christian armies of Rome forced them to, which setup a tradition of most Europeans and later Americans being born into a faith. Were the exact same people born in Saudi Arabia they "would know that they know" that Islam is the true religion, or same in India but applying to Hinduism.

And saying that atheists have had supernatural experiences and can change to theism when talking about it, ignores the whole point of the video, especially the part when he talks about the linked Darren Brown video, which demonstrates that it is easy to make a spiritual experience happen that has no basis on any real god.

By way of example: I used to be a heavy evangelical Christian, I watched TBN and Fox News religiously (pun intended, see this old post of mine here on the sift from an old account that I couldn't recover http://videosift.com/usercomments/Charon... heck see my Revelations from the Word posts on my blog, http://www.brianathomas.com/archives/category/religion/revelations-from-the-word/ or more embarrassing my older political posts http://www.brianathomas.com/archives/category/politics/ which while progressive now, go to page 4 or so around June 2008 and back and you see a Libertarian and further back Republican with some crazy anti-vaccine paranoia , climate change denialism, science denaillism and other things I'm deeply ashamed of now)... I've had deep and meaningful spiritual experiences with god. After Republicans ruined Christianity for me (as the Republican party is clearly 100% against every teaching of Jesus... and yeah we can tick that off as being humans, but god does nothing to correct them, he may have spoke to my heart or whatever one wants to say to have more empathy, but over half the Christians in this nation still vote for a party 100% devoid of the teachings of the Jesus of the Bible while claiming to do it for Christian reasons) and I eventually lost faith (while Republicans are the reason I initially lost faith, they aren't the reason I stayed away, god is a dick is why I stayed away). After I lost faith in the Christian god, I gave paganism a try, and I've had just a meaningful spiritual experiences while worshiping at a Druid rite as I have at any Christian church. This is why people pick a religion, first by accident of birth (most people are Christian in the US because their parents were, and back to Europe where going back further they were forced to convert by invading Christian armies), second by choosing one that connects more personally with them... for many they see the hypocrisy of Christianity (and its general lack of empathy) but do connect with some form of paganism, and pagans generally have a patron god they serve above most others, and that god is the one they have a deep connection to, the same deep connection that Christians claim to have with Jesus/Yahweh... One doesn't drive a plane into a building killing 3,000 plus people without a deep and meaningful relationship with their god, and to dismiss t hat relationship as being deceived is naive and demonstrates a lack of empathy.

Now, I will allow the possibility that god does exist, but not in the form Christians propose, but perhaps closer to what the US Founding Fathers believed, but perhaps expanded a bit with more modern knowledge. A Deist like view. That this god somehow this god, created the energy and set into motion the laws of this physical universe that spun out from the big bang, but he's had nothing to do with anything since then. Perhaps all religions actually worship the same god but with their own culture's expectations and interpretations. However this would mean that all religions and lack there of are equally valid, which most faiths (aside from most modern paganism) doesn't allow for as their claim rests on being the true one.

I've rambled on far too long already so I'll leave it at that.

I have rewritten this post about 20 times.

My first instinct was to tell you that your mom was a moron and you don't even have the excuse of not having the information that mom didn't have.

Oh hey, turns out I'm really not that conflicted on it.

Your attitude is unbelievably selfish. There are kids out there that genuinely cannot be vaccinated, because of (incredibly rare) allergies to the vaccines. You are putting those kids at risk.

@Trancecoach, of course, continues his tradition of not having a fucking clue about anything by spouting complete and utter bollocks espoused by someone who has embraced believing in water memory.

Here's some of your libertarian pals on the reality of vaccination.

It is unfathomable how people in the 21st century can be so mind-numbingly ignorant.

How fucking retarded do you have to be when even FOX MOTHERFUCKING NEWS is smarter than you.

you misunderstand,which may be my fault.
anarchy=no rulers
it does not mean=no government (for some anarchists it may mean that,but not all),nor does it mean=no police or military or public schools and i do not believe i stated anything of the sort.

i also stated that while the anarchist prefers direct democracy,he/she will be ok with representative,as long as they represent..which they dont.

so the anarchist sees this non-representative government and sees it for the vile,corrupted beast it is and states that it should be killed.preferably from orbit.

please understand i am not trying to sway you to my way of thinking or convince you of anything other than to point out that anarchy is not a single,one trick pony.

ok,consider this:you are walking down the street and an important text come in with a pdf attached.you are given information and told that in two days you will be expected to vote on the matter.

just an idea how direct democracy can work.

this discussion is really fascinating me.
i call out hard-liner libertarians for not even acknowledging the massive corrupt influence of the corporation,because it is an intellectually dishonest argument to NOT point out the destructive influences of the monied elite.

i find it just as intellectually dishonest to not address/criticize and question the government.

one does not preclude the other.
we can argue which one gave birth to the other but i dont think anybody can deny that what america has now is NOT a representative democracy but rather a plutocracy.

so just as i dont understand how a hardline libertarian can ignore the power and influence of a corporation and call it "capitalism" (hint:its not),i equally cannot understand the defense of a government that threw its citizens overboard 40 years ago.

i refuse to defend moral bankruptcy,on any level.
i refuse to buy into the "its not perfect but its the best we have"
no..it is not.we can do better and what we have now is far from the best.
best intentions maybe....but not the best..

newt brought up a big point that i was unaware.
this is my flavor of anarchy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism

which to some anarchists makes me a "bad" anarchist,whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.

I used to think like this, but then I finished high school.

Seriously, anarchy is a lovely ideal. Everyone lives in peace and harmony and no-one is tramping anyone elses rights. When a job needs doing, we find someone willing to do it and compensate them (preferably with a barter system or something).

One minor problem though..

IT

DOESN'T

FUCKING

WORK.

We don't live in some kind of post-scarcity utopia. I wish we did, but that is simply not the reality of human society or history. Anarchists and libertarians seem to think that anyone who disagrees with them loves government and simply can't wait to pour their hard earned money in a military industrial complex.

I don't know anyone like that. I don't like my government, and I sure as hell don't like yours. I don't mind paying for hospitals and roads and welfare (and yeah, I don't even really give a fuck about "welfare queens" or "dole bludgers" or other mythical right wing beasties), but I fucking hate the idea that my money goes to fund the pointless "war on drugs" or on mass surveillance.

But I recognise that for all its ills, the system (for the most part) works. People today have a higher standard of living, live longer, and have more rights than at any other time in history. Some of that is down to science; some of it is because of private innovation and some of it is simply that we have changed the way our societies run through elections, etc.

What I do know is that when government becomes beholden to private interests (lobbyists in the USA) shit goes bad. But the solution to that is not to allow powerful people even more leeway to fuck over the weak.

"anarchy simply means =without rulers,it does NOT mean no rules."

I keep hearing Anarchists railing against this. More frequently these days the same claims are being made by Libertarians.

I'm afraid I can't find the intellectual honesty in such claims though. The base argument is that there be no rulers, and also there for no men using force to ensure rules are followed.

If there is to be no system of enforcement for 'rules' then how is that any different than simply having no rules? Without any measure or means of enforcement of rules, for all intents and purposes there are no rules. If there is any enforcement of rules, then there is at some level a ruler and enforcers.

If you want your arguments taken seriously you need to first start by taking our own position seriously as well and at least making it logical consistent. To start from the contradiction of rules without rulers is empty.

Plagiarism? Uncool, dude...uncool.

Or is that another libertarian privilege?

This is a one sided issue because facts are one sided. It's not a political issue except for politicos.
It's always funny to me that the right, who claims they are for freedom and less government in people's lives are also the people who want to make their moral stances law. These are issues of freedom, and the right is against the freedom to act in ways they disagree with, that's it.
Weathermen are not climatologists.
No, abortion is clearly NOT murder. That issue has been clearly solved legally and scientifically long ago. If it were murder, you must believe it involves living, BREATHING children, but it does not. It involves living tissue, non viable living tissue. It's again, the right not living it's rhetoric, libertarians would never force one person to support another bodily, even if you believe the blastocyst is a person.
You and your ilk are ridiculous for your own ignorance and your loud proclamations from it.

I think the Democratic voters failed to turn out for a few reasons. All the media made it seem like it was going to be a Republican win, even the "liberal media" was portraying it that way. This led to a defeatist "what can I do?" mentality. Another is that Democrats failed to really push a couple key issues, namely raising the minimum wage and equal pay for equal work. Heck, even just saying that minimum wage will be tied to inflation and go up with inflation each yet, even if it isn't fully adjusted to where it would be now, would have been a big step forward. They shied away from those, just like when they passed Obamacare they shied away from single payer or the government option that was promised and instead gave us an old Republican plan under the assumption Republicans would be glad the Democrats caved in and accepted a Republican idea.

The Democrats failed to deliver largely because Republican obstructionism. This isn't to absolve them of their failure during the two years they could have really moved forward with a true progressive agenda.

Fox News and the pulpit have the Republican voter base convinced to vote Republican, that Obama is singlehandedly destroying America (I'm surrounded by these people every day, I have to unfortunately live with them, I used to be a right wing, Christian Republican myself, then became a right wing Christian Libertarian before I actually started applying real critical thought to the economic impact of the policies as society stands now and became more Liberal). The pulpit has convinced these people that it doesn't matter Jesus said to help the needy and the poor, to heal the sick, and basically everything 100% opposite of the beliefs of the Republican party, to vote Republican anyhow, and it to be the Christian vote. They deny being Christian Reconstructionist while being clearly Reconstructionist. They say things like "if you actually think about it critically, CO2 is good for plants, so their argument is silly" and they accept it, because plants absorb CO2 they think that CO2 emissions can't be as bad as the environmentalist say it is, after all, greenhouses pump CO2 into them to make plants grow better. Again I was guilty of repeating that sort of non-sense. Then it occurred to me there are no walls around plants in the wild, there is no ceiling to help keep CO2 near where plants are, and the fact that very little of the Earth is filled with green (let alone the fact most plants are doing as much CO2 exchange as they can already).... that most of the Earth is blue... that yes the ocean absorbs CO2, but in doing to warms it and that drives massive changes including storms in of itself and learned the real consequences of CO2 emissions.

As Ralph Nader recently pointed out (http://videosift.com/video/Ralph-Nader-on-GOP-8482-s-2014-Wins) the Democrats can't just blame Citizens United or attempts by Republicans to try and limit voting among the poor, they have to take a look at the fact they didn't push the issues that most Americans stand behind but didn't push.

I like the idea of moving elections to the weekend. That probably would help more than some calls of late to make it a Federal Holiday. Most places don't close on Federal Holiday's anyhow, so that won't really help as much as moving it to a weekend... of course one could also argue that people might not want to take time out of their weekends to vote.

yeah, isn't abusing the voting system a bannable offense @dag?

hell can we ban him just for the fad he's apparently started of modifying quotes of users he doesn't like in an extremely childish and unconstructive manner. other people are picking up on it to retaliate....and it's just stupid.

and @enoch, I don't think even libertarians would claim @blankfist He's too nuts even for them.

so you agree with me yet still downvote my comment?
i thought i was being respectful by explaining my downvote,something i am under zero compulsion to do,at all.

and yet you go off on a childish tantrum and systematically downvote about 3 hours of content in my pque...in FIVE minutes! which can lead me to only one conclusion:
emotional reflex response to a negative analysis to a useless and irrelevant video you posted.

you do not understand why this is irrelevant?
i have to admit a certain embarrassment for you that i have to point this out,but ok,take my hand and i will walk you through it so you can better understand:

1.air contains oxygen
2.water is wet
3.everybody poops
4.politicians and governments lie

you had an opportunity here to reveal just how convoluted and deceptive the process had been perverted and corrupted.how back door deals and the greased palms of certain politicians helped fascillitate the passing of obamacare.

how big pharma and the health insurance industry spent 300 million in the first week alone to kill this bill.or how those very same politicians allowed a tax on that health care bill to remain in the bill.

you could have added context to what really transpired and the mafia principle was in full effect.government gets their slice and the health industry continues to be allowed to plunder the american people treasure.

but no.
you posted a 53 second video of a politician caught in a moment of truth.
a truth WE ALREADY KNOW,with the sole purpose of "look!see! governments are bad!

no context.
no backstory.
no nuanced information to give people a clearer picture on just how badly we are all being fucked.
just a 53 second prop so you can get on your soapbox.

so yeah..the video is irrelevant.

unless of course...you think everybody around you is a stupid child and needs you to hold their hands to reveal the underlying truth.if that is the case you have failed miserably.

well,i dont need you to hold my hand.i am quite capable of coming to my own conclusions.

i am becoming quite tired of your temper tantrums.so if my words have angered your tender sensibilities then feel free to go on another targeted downvoting spree..i really dont care.

@blankfist is a die hard libertarian.thoughtful and precise in his arguments (sans the farting cats),and you sir..are no blankfist.